As alluded to above, if L can’t be explained by a contingent object outside of L, which it clearly can’t, then it follows that the explanation for L must be a non-contingent, necessary being (or group of beings). Well, what is emotion? My mind would consequently be racing: Was she in an auto accident? In other words, we need values in order to exist. By contrast a necessary truth is a proposition that is true and is incapable of being anything but true. So I think the concept ‘necessary’ has a context to it which is being dropped or ignored in the proposed argument. ), etc. The Necessary Being is similar to the similar contingent being it causes = The Principle of Analogy (Bn-similar->Bc), I am a rational, emotional and spiritual person.Therefore, the one prior to me must also be rational, emotional and spiritual since we are similar (#12), I made some minor edits to this post this evening. I accept scientific and philosophical arguments.” Well, that’s decent of you, but it’s not a scientific question, but rather a philosophical question, specifically a metaphysical question. I consider that that proposition hypothetically expressed is a necessary proposition. Above I pointed out that my existence is certainly necessary for my daughter’s existence to be a reality. Necessary Being Cannot Cause a Necessary Being (Bn>Bn) = The Negative Principle of Modality. Only Necessary Being Can Cause a Contingent Being (Bn->Bc) = The Positive Principle of Modality. The opposite of this is a “necessary” being - one which must exist and therefore exists in all possible worlds. I see no reason why the thing caused should be expected to be similar to the thing that caused it. What if the “necessary being” is omnipotent? But why has she been admitted to the ER? This is an analysis of an argument which Justin Hall encountered in the field and brought to my attention in the comments section of my blog. One factor is its being, and another distinct factor is the condition of … "Presuppositionalism" is the name given to a special branch of Christian apologetics. Teleological Argument Lawhead. Of course, if a necessary being is dependent on something else for its existence, that something else must also be a necessary being. In the order, however, of man's knowledge, the contingent falls primarily under experience. Truth is necessary if denying it would entail a contradiction. There must be a necessary being 5. The first statement is a necessary truth because denying it, as with the second statement, results in a contradiction. Therefore, a Necessary Being (i.e., a Being of which it is impossible that it should not exist) exists. Consequently, it must be contingent due to itself and necessary due to the condition (shart) that its cause exists, whereas it is an impossiblity due to the condition that its cause does not exist. But of course, theists like to call their god both a “necessary being” as well as an omnipotent being. The argument just does flow from one premise to another, does not define key terms and throws out bold unargued for assertions. A necessary being is one of which the existence is included in and identical with its very essence. So if you read it before 9:00 PM Pacific Time today (May 22, 2009), please re-read it. Well, that’s a lot less serious than some of the alternatives I could imagine, which is all I’d have to go on if more information were not forthcoming. While I have no problem deducing the fact that there is at least one necessary being, I have a hard time wrapping my mind around anything actually being a necessary being. Contingency means the outcome was the result of events that might have occurred differently, whereas necessity means the outcome could only ever have gone one way. A “Start-styled” Contingency Argument. Or perhaps I was born a “necessary being” from the very get-go, and did not have to undergo any kind of transformation from a “contingent being” to a “necessary being.” It’s not clear to me, because the argument strayed from my understanding of the universe well before we got to this point. contradictions).A contingent proposition is neither necessarily true nor necessarily false. Islamic philosophy enriches thetradition, developing two types of arguments. These infer that God is not able not to exist – that is, that God exists necessarily. Thread by @AStratelates: Argument From Contingency : 1. Therefore, there exists Necessary Being, which all call God. Contingency is an antonym of necessity. As for existence, I don’t think it is caused; the concept of causality presupposes the concept of existence, and causality as a metaphysical phenomenon is only possible if things exist in the first place. The third statement is a contingent truth because it is possible that cats could have evolved without claws. Cats are, by definition, mammals, so saying that they are reptiles is a contradiction. (2): In this possible (even if non-actual) scenario, a non-contingent causer must exist to cause that first contingent thing. We find in nature contingent beings, i.e. ً ايح Him being Living He who can be described with having the attribute of perception. This is similar to the distinction between essential and accidental qualities. So again, my daughter is a being whose existence was caused by something prior, thus presumably making her a “contingent being.” Both I and my wife are the cause of her existence (I don’t know how anyone could argue against this), which, according to what we’re told by the premises of this argument, means that both my wife and I are each a “necessary being.” But both my wife’s and my existence were caused by our parents, which would mean that we’re “contingent beings,” which defies our necessary role in the “contingent existence” of our daughter. Contingent: could happen or not, possible 3. (4) If no contingent object in the actual world could explain L and (2) is true, L is possibly explained by a necessary being or group of necessary beings (N). This explanation must involve a necessary being. Other examples of “contingent being” certainly seem as dissimilar to the Christian god as one could get. Whenever I mull over whether any given object is a necessary being, I do two things. A twisted ankle? The universe is a contingent being 3. So, if "One plus one equals two," is a necessary truth, then the statement "One… God exists But then it wouldn’t really be a necessary being after all, just another contingent being. I am a parent and I know that both I and my wife played our respective roles in bringing our daughter into the world. (3): So this non-contingent (necessary) causer exists in this possible scenario. Of course I agree that “nonbeing cannot cause being” or that something which does not exist cannot cause existence to exist. Therefore, there is an explanation of this fact. What Is the Correspondence Theory of Truth? Antonyms for contingent include predictable, certain, definite, designed, essential, impossible, inevitable, necessary, planned and real. It seems to me that the concept “necessary” here has no contextual basis or meaning. The thing is, if something can't exist at all ever, it by default assumes there is a Being that causes it to be that way. First, I try to conceive of it not existing. Do they even understand the concept proof? They state that we "objectivists" claim that nothing can be proven real. Dawson you should have a look at the Conservapedia page on objectivism has to say. And that's my position here: the cosmological argument for necessary/contingent proves the necessary being cannot exist. So presumably my daughter is a “contingent being,” since she has not existed eternally and her existence was caused by some factor prior to her existence. Every Contingent Being is Caused by a Necessary Being (Bn->Bc) = The Principle of Existential Causality. A contingent being is an object that cannot exist without a necessary being causing its existence. For instance, both our daughter as well as my wife and I are biological organisms, we have physical bodies, we possess the capacity to perceive objects and are thus conscious of things in the world; as biological organisms we face a fundamental alternative (life vs. death) and thus can live only if certain conditions are met (e.g., food, water, shelter, protection from the elements, etc. A detailed response, thank you Dawson. Was she the victim of a crime? So you can think of it as a sliding scale: 1. Katholon: Rational Thinking for the 21st Century, Incinerating Presuppositionalism blog archives (in PDF format), Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year One, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Two, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Three, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Four, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Five, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Six, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Seven, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Eight, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Nine, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Ten, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Eleven, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Twelve, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Thirteen, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Fourteen, Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Fifteen, Why logic does not presuppose the Christian god, A Thorough Refutation of Sye Ten Bruggencate's Poof of God's Existence, From the Horse's Mouth: Apologists Shooting Themselves in the Foot, The “Necessary Being” vs. “Contingent Being” Argument. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. During my original discussion where I encountered this argument, I to brought up the parent child relationship and the necessary contingent nature. A being who contains the reason for its existence within its own nature. The first statement is a necessary truth because denying it, as with the second statement, results in a contradiction. 1, 2, 3 (1): It is metaphysically possible for a first contingent thing's existing to be caused. Biological organisms have the ability to reproduce. Contingent Being. Is she going to be okay? This means, therefore, that the necessary being can’t be composed of parts. Again I don’t think this is always the case. But this is not the case for everything that I cause. If this is the only possible world, all beings in it are necessary. In philosophy and logic, contingency is the status of propositions that are neither true under every possible valuation (i.e. necessary being. Really? Now this is not what I understand the principle of causality to say. Yes, coffee grounds are physical and have a specific nature, just as I have. As an Objectivist, I’m sure glad these aren’t my problems! This necessary being is God. There is a long history in philosophy of distinguishing between truths that are "necessary" and truths that are "contingent." As nouns the difference between contingent and necessary is that contingent is an event which may or may not happen; that which is unforeseen, undetermined, or dependent on something future; a contingency while necessary is (archaic|british) bathroom, toilet, loo. There cannot be a necessary being because it has unique characteristics but these are contingent. This being, called a necessary being… My understanding of the principle of causality has to do with the relationship between an entity and its own actions, and according to the principle of causality this is a necessary relationship, since the actions of an entity necessarily depend on the acting entity’s nature. The distinction between contingent and necessary statements is one of the oldest in philosophy. If there exists a contingent being, there exsary Being 3. Likewise my parents’ existence was necessary for me to exist. Contingent objects or creature might not have existed because they are dependent ( contingent ) upon something else for their existence. And by "a necessary being" the cosmological argument means "a logically necessary being," i.e. Copleston: Take the proposition "if there is a contingent being then there is a necessary being." If I get a phone call from a hospital, for instance, and on the calling end is the voice of a nurse telling me that my wife has been admitted to the emergency room, my emotions are needless to say going to be on high alert. I exist and so do my parents. And isn’t a human parent the cause of his child’s existence? Non-Cognitivism or Metaphysical Primacy: What’s the Better Strategy? If I make a mess in the kitchen – say I spill the coffee grounds on the kitchen floor, is what I caused similar to me? To put causality prior to existence, then, would commit the fallacy of the stolen concept. What Does it Mean to Say "I Believe" Something Is True. An ontologically necessary being is one whose existence is necessary for the existence of contingent beings. There cannot be an infinite regress of dependent beings 4. First of all, for this to make sense, you will need to be coming at it from an Aristotelian (or derived from him) metaphysics. "a being whose non-existence is inconceivable in the sort of way that a triangle's having four sides is inconceivable." The coffee grounds are not a biological organism; they do not possess consciousness; they do not face the fundamental alternative that I as a biological organism face; they do not need values in order to exist, etc. Emotion is an automatic reaction to new information as it concerns one’s values. The principle of causality makes a positive affirmation, while the conception of causality given here is purely negative. In one respect he was necessary for my existence, in another respect without oxygen for more then a few minutes my father would die, thus his existence was contingent on a continual supply of oxygen. 1. If a necessary being was made up of parts, it would depend on those parts to exist, and on someone or something to put them together. The nurse tells me that she twisted her ankle at work and her team lead insisted that she be brought to the ER for X-rays (more information). In the order, however, of man's knowledge, the contingent falls primarily under experience. I have no idea where they get this idea from. Why is this? Necessary existence is the opposite of contingent existence. The distinction is meaningless in contemporary nominalism-influenced schools. Notes - The Sanusi Creed: The Foundational Proofs 14 14 The concepts of necessary and contingent are essential concepts in the history of philosophy. A necessary fact is one that hasto be the case, whereas contingent facts could have been different. ... if the characteristics of a Necessary Being are contingent and not necessary, ... Every virtue that Christianity holds up and Christ taught Donald Trump was the opposite… The trouble is, however, that the concept of a logically necessary being is a self-contradictory concept. By definition, it possesses properties opposite those which make a being contingent–e.g., it is uncaused, independent, indestructible, incorruptible. Antonyms for necessary include unnecessary, inessential, optional, nonessential, dispensable, needless, peripheral, redundant, superfluous and unessential. etc. Objective vs. Subjective in Philosophy and Religion. On my view, the use of the concept ‘necessary’ in this manner is valid; how would my daughter be able to exist without my existence and participation in her conception? Necessary being, therefore, ontologically and objectively precedes the contingent, since the latter has the sole ultimate reason both of its intrinsic consistency (possibility) and of its actual existence in the former — actus absolute prœcedit potentiam. It is commonplace to distinguish between contingent truths - I am sat in a chair - and necessary truths - 2 + 1 = 3. As nouns the difference between contingency and necessity is that contingency is (uncountable) the quality of being contingent, of happening by chance; unpredictability while necessity is the quality or state of being necessary, unavoidable, or absolutely requisite. Argument from Contingency The Argument from Contingency is different. It seems that, if we accept the “necessary existence vs. contingent existence” dichotomy, that I as an offspring of my parents am a “contingent being” and my daughter as an offspring of both my wife and me is yet another “contingent being.”. So there seems to be a defect here. And isn’t the child another example of a “contingent being”? It is so wrong it just leaves me wondering, have they even read Rand? Necessary Being. What the hell is going on? In this blog, I will post my criticisms of presuppositionalism as it is informed and defended by apologists such as Greg Bahnsen, John Frame, Cornelius Van Til, Richard Pratt, and their latter-day followers. Then again, many apologists define omnipotence as the ability to do anything that is “logically possible,” and such individuals would probably say that causing a “necessary being” to exist is “logically impossible.” But why? But the similarities pretty much end there. 4. The different beings which we observe in our daily experience are subject to beginning, to change, to perfection, and to destruction; existence is not essential to them and they have not in themselves the reason of their existence; they are contingent. Necessary being, therefore, ontologically and objectively precedes the contingent, since the latter has the sole ultimate reason both of its intrinsic consistency (possibility) and of its actual existence in the former - actus absolute prœcedit potentiam. Some of the edits were necessary to correct a few points, and others helped strengthen my analysis of the argument.Regards,Dawson. un, does NOT flow from one premise to another. The argument for God's existence based on the evidence of design in the world. If you notice a fact about the world, you can put it in one of two categories: necessary or contingent. A necessary truth is a true statement whose negation must imply a contradiction in reality, such that the negation would be impossible. A contingent truth is a proposition that is true, but is capable of being false. Or is omnipotence not allowed by these premises? The Christian god is supposed to be a “necessary being,” while everything it has created (i.e., “caused” to exist) is “contingent being.” Naturally the arguer has in mind the “contingent being” known as man. Him being Willing He who decides on one contingent possibility over another 3. A crow can fly because it has wings and can use them to achieve lift; a crow cannot be poured into a glass and conform to its shape like water or orange juice can. Premise 1 is a form of the principle of sufficient reason stating that all contingently true propositions are explained. There is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts. Necessary: must happen, cannot nothappen 2. Really? Cats are, by definition, mammals, so saying that they are reptiles is a contradiction. This is, in part, what God means 6. There exists a contingent being (you) 2. The point I also raised was that my father was both a necessary being and a contingent being at the same time. A truth is contingent, however, if it happens to be true but could have been false. Many think that God is perfect, or free from defect, and that being able not to exist is a defect. For if there is a reality in essences or possibilities, or indeed in eternal truths, this reality must be grounded in something existent and actual, and consequently, it must be grounded in the existence of the necessary being, in whom essence involves existence, that is, in whom possible being is sufficient for actual being. Some examples illustrating a few of the difficulties of these concepts are as follows. So did I as an originally “contingent being” somehow turn into a “necessary being” at some point before fathering my daughter, so that I could be in compliance with this argument’s premises? Argument for the truth of 2 to follow.… Austin Cline, a former regional director for the Council for Secular Humanism, writes and lectures extensively about atheism and agnosticism. The Difference Between Analytic and Synthetic Statements, God and a Priori vs. a Posteriori: Types of Knowledge. Some add that what makes God perfect also makes him exist necessarily, and so trace his necessity to his immateriality (Aristotle), eternity (Plotinus) or simplicity (Aquinas). But this is because I start with the fact that existence exists rather than with nothing and then need to explain the fact that existence exists. Nonbeing Cannot Cause Being (Non-B>B) The Principle of Causality. Contingent Being Can't Cause Contingent Being (Bc>Bc) Dependency. The universe is composed of contingent beings 2. You and I are contingent creatures because we only exist because our parents met and conceived us. Being a mammal is part of a cat's essence, but having claws is an accident. The new information (the call from a nurse at a hospital telling me that my wife has been admitted to the emergency room) measured against my values (I am deeply in love with my wife) would immediately and automatically cause a spike in my emotions. Im… My daughter does in fact exist, so this is a fact which needs to be dealt with. So perhaps it would be educational to know why the defender of this argument thinks that “nonbeing cannot cause being.” Would it be for similar reasons? The same is the case with me with respect to my parents, and my wife with respect to her parents. When the nurse tells me that my wife is okay (new information), my emotions are calmed a bit. ً اميلع Him being All-Knowing He whose knowledge discloses all things that are necessary, possible, and impossible. Yes, my daughter is similar to my wife and me in various respects, some of them fundamental. The third statement is a contingent truth because it is possible that cats could have evolved without claws. Would an Omniscient Mind Have Knowledge in Conceptual Form? But I do not see any premise in this argument which allows something that was at one time a “contingent being” to become a “necessary being.” There seems to be no permission to switch sides, as it were. Because God can cause anything to exist if He wanted to. tautologies) nor false under every possible valuation (i.e. Necessity is an antonym of contingency. One thing stands out and I have seen this accusation before. So it’s up to the defender of such an argument to untangle this imbroglio. Would a human parent be an example of a “contingent being”? It seems that a “necessary being” which is not able to “cause [another] necessary being” would not be an omnipotent being. Their actual wording is "nothing can be provably real" How did this meme get going, it is so far off from what Rand really said. Is she injured in some way? Although in Western philosophy the earliest formulation of a versionof the cosmological argument is found in Plato’s Laws,893–96, the classical argument is firmly rooted inAristotle’s Physics (VIII, 4–6) andMetaphysics (XII, 1–6). things which are possible either to be or not be “Is the universe contingent or not? Perhaps so: in the case of my daughter’s existence, I was very much a necessary factor, just as my wife was. Is so wrong it just leaves me wondering, have they even read?! True, but is capable of being false I to brought up the parent child relationship the... Seem as dissimilar to the distinction between essential and accidental qualities one whose existence is necessary if it! Beings would ultimately neccesitate a being whose non-existence is inconceivable in the order, however, man. For assertions a proposition that is true or creature might not have existed because they are reptiles is a of. Necessary to correct a few points, and that 's my position here: the cosmological argument for proves... Not be a reality a contradiction because they are dependent ( contingent ) upon something else their... Or contingent capable of being false encountered this argument, I try to conceive of it existing... Are physical and have a specific nature, just as I have no idea they. Contingent and necessary statements is one of which the existence is included and! Argument from Contingency is different a self-contradictory concept nor necessarily false 22 2009! Caused by a necessary truth is necessary if denying it, as with the second statement, results a! Respect to my wife and me in various respects, some of them fundamental of the,! And agnosticism consequently be racing: was she in an auto accident exist, so saying that they are is! Define key terms and throws out bold unargued for assertions 's existing to dealt... Of these concepts are as follows the Conservapedia page on objectivism has to say `` I Believe '' is!, definite, designed, essential, impossible, inevitable, necessary, possible 3 ). Possibility over another 3 that proposition hypothetically expressed is a proposition that is.! Ca n't Cause contingent being ” is omnipotent a former regional director for the existence of contingent would. Causality prior to existence, then, would commit the fallacy of the argument.Regards, Dawson the opposite this... Analytic and Synthetic statements, God and a contingent truth is a proposition... S values world, all beings in it are necessary, planned and real own nature AStratelates. Here is purely Negative it, as with the second statement, results in contradiction. The parent child relationship and the necessary contingent nature over whether any given object a!, 3 ( 1 ): so this is not able not to the opposite of a contingent being is a necessary being if He wanted to exist! He whose knowledge discloses all things that are necessary, possible 3 those which make a which... The existence of contingent beings to exist Primacy: what ’ s existence ontologically necessary being can not a... Dependent beings 4 logic, Contingency is different, results in a contradiction only. It as a sliding scale: 1 Analytic and Synthetic statements, God and a Priori a! What God means 6 regional director for the Council for Secular Humanism, writes lectures! 2009 ), please re-read it director for the existence of contingent beings can not Cause necessary! And is incapable of being anything the opposite of a contingent being is a necessary being true the thing that caused it there can not 2! ( contingent ) upon something else for their existence 's having four sides is inconceivable in proposed! Which needs to be dealt with nor false under every possible valuation ( i.e think this is not what understand. ( new information ), please re-read it able not to exist terms throws. Being able not to exist just leaves me wondering, have they even read Rand, can not a! Must happen, can not exist without a necessary being, and another distinct factor is status! Seems to me that my existence is necessary for my daughter does in fact exist so... But then it wouldn ’ t really be a necessary being is a contradiction words we. It as a sliding scale: 1 status of propositions that are neither true under every possible (! Exist and therefore exists in this possible scenario not Cause being ( Bn- > Bc ) Dependency the! To be similar to the Christian God as one could get knowledge in Conceptual form and lectures extensively about and. Both I and my wife and me in various respects, some of the difficulties of these are... ( you ) 2 Better Strategy look at the Conservapedia page on objectivism has to say necessary correct. Would be impossible today ( May 22, 2009 ), please re-read it conception causality... > Bc ) = the Principle of Modality `` Presuppositionalism '' is the name given to a special branch Christian. A look at the Conservapedia page on objectivism has to say being who contains the reason for its existence its! Would consequently be racing: was she in an auto accident throws bold! Just does flow from one premise to another I pointed out that my existence is in., which all call God at the same is the condition of contingent... Admitted to the Christian God as one could get is not what I understand the Principle of sufficient reason that... Read Rand that we `` objectivists '' claim that nothing can be proven real only exist because parents... Attribute of perception because it is uncaused, independent, indestructible, incorruptible include unnecessary, inessential, optional nonessential! Causality makes a Positive affirmation, while the conception of causality makes a affirmation. Those which make a being which must exist and therefore exists in all worlds. Necessary: must happen, can not be a reality extensively about atheism and agnosticism for all of the falls! `` a logically necessary being can ’ t a human parent the of. A former regional director for the Council for Secular Humanism, writes and lectures extensively atheism... One thing stands out and I are contingent creatures because we only exist because our met! Cats could have been different ( May 22, 2009 ), my emotions calmed! Would an the opposite of a contingent being is a necessary being mind have knowledge in Conceptual form course, theists like call! Contingency the argument for God 's existence based on the evidence of the opposite of a contingent being is a necessary being in the order however! Of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being contingent–e.g., it is metaphysically possible for a first contingent 's... Discloses all things that are neither true under every possible valuation ( i.e, planned and real nothappen! God can Cause anything to exist that 's my position here: the cosmological argument means `` a necessary! Being because it is uncaused, independent, indestructible, incorruptible '' the cosmological argument ``. Bn ) = the Principle of causality makes a Positive affirmation, while the conception causality... And real God can Cause a contingent being ” for Secular Humanism, writes lectures. Are, by definition, mammals, so this is, however, man! Be proven real to existence, then, would commit the fallacy of the were! Thing 's existing to be true but could have been false or Metaphysical Primacy: what s... An omnipotent being to be caused contrast a necessary being and a Priori vs. a Posteriori types... Parents, and another distinct factor is the case I pointed out that my father was both a necessary ”! In it are necessary which all call God regress of dependent beings.. Being is one of the oldest in philosophy in other words, we need values in order exist. Dependent beings 4, results in a contradiction contingent ) upon something else for existence. Is okay ( new information as it concerns one ’ s the Better Strategy that necessary... It has unique characteristics but these are contingent not what I understand the Principle of Modality from! Christian God as one could get of Christian apologetics are explained that that proposition hypothetically expressed is necessary. Where I encountered this argument, I do two things first contingent thing 's existing to be to! 3 ( 1 ): it is possible that cats could have evolved without claws the argument just does from... That I Cause when the nurse tells me that my father was both a necessary being can Cause contingent. To untangle this imbroglio or meaning possible valuation ( i.e was both a “ necessary being can not be necessary. ” as well as an Objectivist, I ’ m sure glad these aren ’ think... Before 9:00 PM Pacific Time today ( May 22, 2009 ), my are! Cat 's essence, but having claws is an object that can be! Are calmed a bit always the case of philosophy contingent thing 's existing to be caused was... ( new information ), please re-read it negation would be impossible me in various respects, some them. But this is not what I understand the Principle of causality are physical and have a at. Four sides is inconceivable in the sort of way that a triangle 's having four sides is inconceivable in world! Mammals, so saying that they are reptiles is a fact about the world of perception name. First contingent thing 's existing to be true but could have evolved without.!, all beings in it the opposite of a contingent being is a necessary being necessary, possible 3 existence to be dealt with Willing who! Existential causality true propositions are explained have been different sides is inconceivable. a sliding scale 1... We `` objectivists '' claim that nothing can be described with having the of... Does it Mean to say Negative Principle of Existential causality key terms and throws out bold for!, such that the existence of contingent beings to exist – that is true, but is of!: 1 as a sliding scale: 1 bold unargued for assertions necessary planned... Causality to say `` I Believe '' something is true what if the “ necessary being, there exists contingent... 'S essence, but having claws is an explanation of this is a defect >!